I've been watching a thread (and a poll) on Team Camaro about manual vs power steering with great interest. My 68 has power steering and I'm not about to switch to manual... Haven't owned a car with maual steering since the 60s. (Let's face it, at slow speeds or in a tight situation, it's like driving a bus.) But several of my classic car friends (and I noticed in this poll several folks who have maual steering) claim they can "feel" the road better.

Only advantage I can imagine is freeing up a few Hp by not driving a power steering pump. If the car is balanced properly, the "feel" of the road should be just as good with power steering. As an example, NASCAR takes full advantage of power steering - and for good reason.

Except for originality issues, I can't envision why you wouldn't want power steering - or power brakes.

I have power steering on my '69Z, and it works fine; it's over-boosted like all GM systems were in the 60's-70's, but that's the way it was back then. Mine was manual when I got it, but I tired of the low-speed steering effort and converted it to power using all factory parts.

Any '70 Corvette that weighs 4000# is carrying 700# of lead ballast - they weighed 3300# with a full tank of fuel - about the same as a '69 Camaro. Now that I think about it.(geez its been 30 yrs) It could have been another car. I'm fairly sure my camaro was #4000 lbs

Any '70 Corvette that weighs 4000# is carrying 700# of lead ballast - they weighed 3300# with a full tank of fuel - about the same as a '69 Camaro. Now that I think about it.(geez its been 30 yrs) It could have been another car. I'm fairly sure my camaro was #4000 lbs

i have power in my 67 and my friend has no power. The thing I "feel" is the extra energy you exert to turn the car!!!!!!! I had want we called "quick ratio" steering on my '69 AMX. No power but it sure felt different than a normal no power steering system.